Math and Logic Puzzles: Redux
Forum rules
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
Start with a specific permutation. If all the characters in the string of length n are distinct, there are (n choose 2) possible inversions to perform, and therefore (n choose 2) neighbours to the corresponding vertex.
On the other hand, if any two characters in the permutation are the same, inverting the substring starting and ending with these characters is the same as inverting the substring between these two characters. Therefore, each pair of copies of characters reduces the number of distinct permutations that can be created by inversion (and therefore the number of neighbouring vertices) by 1.
Note that there are two degenerate cases: If two copies of the same character are consecutive or have a third arbitrary character between them, then the corresponding substring between these two copies is too short to be inverted; once again such an inversion can be ignored when counting the degree of a vertex.
Since every vertex corresponds to a permutation of the same collection of characters, the number of pairs of copies of characters, k, is the same for every vertex. Then, the degree of every vertex is (n choose 2) - k, and the graph is regular.
I'm sleepy, so I hope I didn't mess the reasoning up. I also can't think of any interesting problems right now, so someone else can ask something, instead.You don't have ambiguity; you haveoptions.- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
Answer 1: 25. Product of bottom numbers minus sum of top numbers.
Answer 2: 11. Bottom left number + 3.
Answer 3: 5. 23 - 2 * top left number.
Answer 4: 17. 2 * Top right number + 5.
Answer 5: 5. 15 - 2 * bottom right number.
Answer 6: 9. Sum of top numbers, multiplied by π, divided by bottom right number, and rounded down.You don't have ambiguity; you haveoptions.- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
I think it can be done if we split the proof up into odd and even perfect numbers.
1) Let n be an odd perfect number with k divisors s_1 < s_2 < ... < s_k that is refactorable. Then n = s_1 + s_2 + ... + s_{k - 1} and n = ak for some integer a. Since n is odd, a and k have to be odd, and so do all s_i. But if k is odd, k - 1 is even. An even sum of odd integers is even, so we have that n is even, contradicting the hypothesis.
2) Let n be an even perfect number. Then n is of the form (2^k - 1)2^{k - 1} with 2^k - 1 prime, and n has 2k divisors. Observe that since 2^k - 1 is prime, so is k. Therefore, if 2k divides n = (2^k - 1)2^{k - 1}, then either k = 2, or k = 2^k - 1 (the only prime divisors of n). If k = 2, n = 6, which is not refactorable, and there is no prime k > 1 so that k = 2^k - 1.You don't have ambiguity; you haveoptions.- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
Since you insist: You can't. By the time the will takes effect, the trader is dead. It is impossible to change the number of camels, assuming you have provided all pertinent information, thus at least one camel will have to be chopped up.
If we allow silly solutions like lending a dead man a camel, he now has 18 camels, which can be divided as you have requested. The sum I gave shows that one camel will be left over, which can then be returned to the lender.You don't have ambiguity; you haveoptions.- Mitillos
-
Mitillos HeMafia Scum
- Mitillos
He- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: August 23, 2012
- Pronoun: He
- Contact:
This is extremely incorrect. The only way to divide the 17 camels "fair and square" is to give each of the sons the amount stipulated in the will, including part-camels.In post 102, vizIIsto wrote:You don't need to 'lend a camel' to solve it, but adding an extra camel is how you will be able to divide the 17 camels fair and square.
To see why this is true, consider a similar scenario, where the father leaves one sixth of his camels to each of his three sons and dictates that the remainder are to be released. Let's say he happens to have 18 camels. Normally, this would mean that each son gets 3 camels, with 9 left-over and released. If we accept the idea of adding camels and then removing them, we could add another 18 camels for a total of 36, give each son 6 camels (twice what the will states), and then return the remaining 18 camels to wherever we got them from, leaving no released camels. This is a ridiculous way to do a will, given that it results in going in opposition to what the deceased stated their intent to be.You don't have ambiguity; you haveoptions. - Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos
- Mitillos